Add to ORKGThe author examines the development and current status of third-party standing in the federal courts, with special attention to its justification in light of the Supreme Court\u27s decisions on mootness in class actions. Professor Rohr suggests that for the sake of clarity, economy, and consistency of approach, federal courts should grant third-party standing to any litigant who appears reasonably likely to give adequate representation to the interests of the third parties whose rights the litigant wishes to assert
In this Article, Professor Silver examines Section 108 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which limits...
In this Article, Professor Silver examines Section 108 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which limits...
The increasing number of public interest lawsuits suggests that federal courts increasingly will c...
The author examines the development and current status of third-party standing in the federal courts...
When can a litigant assert someone else’s rights in federal court? The courts currently purport to a...
Third-party standing is relevant to a wide range of constitutional and statutory cases. The Supreme ...
In Kowalski v. Tesmer, the Supreme Court held that attorneys lack standing to assert the rights of i...
Traditional constitutional theory posits a narrow conception of the issues that a litigant properly ...
This article examines third party standing cases in the United States, Canada, and Australia. It dem...
The law of contracts for the benefit of third persons has gone through the same development in the f...
No jurisdictional principle is more fundamental to the federal judiciary than the doctrine of standi...
It is the purpose of this article to examine the statutory provisions, and the regulations and pract...
This paper critically assesses the Hague Rules’ stance on third-party joinder. Third-party joinder i...
The standing, ripeness, and mootness doctrines are frequently criticized by those who seek greater a...
From the Introduction In the last Term at the United States Supreme Court [2022], standing was the c...
In this Article, Professor Silver examines Section 108 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which limits...
In this Article, Professor Silver examines Section 108 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which limits...
The increasing number of public interest lawsuits suggests that federal courts increasingly will c...
The author examines the development and current status of third-party standing in the federal courts...
When can a litigant assert someone else’s rights in federal court? The courts currently purport to a...
Third-party standing is relevant to a wide range of constitutional and statutory cases. The Supreme ...
In Kowalski v. Tesmer, the Supreme Court held that attorneys lack standing to assert the rights of i...
Traditional constitutional theory posits a narrow conception of the issues that a litigant properly ...
This article examines third party standing cases in the United States, Canada, and Australia. It dem...
The law of contracts for the benefit of third persons has gone through the same development in the f...
No jurisdictional principle is more fundamental to the federal judiciary than the doctrine of standi...
It is the purpose of this article to examine the statutory provisions, and the regulations and pract...
This paper critically assesses the Hague Rules’ stance on third-party joinder. Third-party joinder i...
The standing, ripeness, and mootness doctrines are frequently criticized by those who seek greater a...
From the Introduction In the last Term at the United States Supreme Court [2022], standing was the c...
In this Article, Professor Silver examines Section 108 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which limits...
In this Article, Professor Silver examines Section 108 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which limits...
The increasing number of public interest lawsuits suggests that federal courts increasingly will c...